Talk:James Blake (musician)

Controversy section
I removed the section titled controversy. This single event is not relevant to his career as an artist, and to include it here with no other substantative controversy forthcoming is to give it undue weight. Faja22 (talk) 23:54, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio query
Copied from User talk:Bigger digger

Hi. I noticed you recently put a copyvio notice on the above article, claiming that it was a copyright violation of. However, if you look at that link BBC music uses the text from the Wikipedia article! I've reverted this now. Just thought I'd let you know. Thanks! Mhiji (talk) 19:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmm.... The article uses that page as its main source so not sure about that. I'll have more of a dig around. Thanks for letting me know. Bigger digger (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Not really, the only part which uses that page as a source is the sentence which says that his songs have been played by various Radio 1 DJs, which the source does state (if you look at the "Played by" section on the right). Mhiji (talk) 20:00, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Though saying that, the article would benefit from having more sources. Mhiji (talk) 20:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem I have is that the original article uses that BBC page, so what had the BBC written at the time? I can't get the wayback machine to find an older version of the page. I have got some other sources and will add them as soon as I'm sure I'm not adding to a WP:COPYVIO'd article. In fact, I'm going to move this whole conversation to Talk:James Blake (musician) as it's probably more useful there. Bigger digger (talk) 20:17, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * End of copied text
 * I'm going to go and get some more expert help. Bigger digger (talk) 20:19, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * BBC Music do not write biographies of musicians. BBC Music uses Wikipedia, MusicBrainz and other sources to provide information about an artist. They also provide details of when an artist's tracks have been played on the BBC and provide links to BBC album reviews, news articles and other content around the BBC website. The link was used on the original article purely to show that the DJ's listed, Zane Lowe, Annie Mac, Huw Stephens, Gilles Peterson and Mary Ann Hobbs, had played the artists music, nothing more (however now a different list of DJs are included in the "Played by" section as this is constantly updated with the DJs who play music by the artist most). I really don't see why there is an issue? Mhiji (talk) 20:29, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure the BBC used to write their own biographies, and the whole thing makes me a bit suspicious – I've seen enough articles that are copies of their sources that I would just like a second eye to look over it. When I said "main" source and perhaps meant "most cited". The other sources of use are: Perhaps we should just re-write based on these, whaddya think? Bigger digger (talk) 20:41, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/rockandpopfeatures/7864029/New-faces-James-Blake.html
 * http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/musicblog/2010/sep/28/james-blake-i-only-know
 * http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2010/apr/20/new-band-james-blake
 * and some stuff from http://pitchfork.com/news/tags/james-blake/


 * I saw this posted to the CP board and have been looking into it. I have been unable to find an archived copy of the particular BBC page, but they've been using Wikipedia for their bios at least back to 2008 (e.g., ) which obviously predates the article, and I was unable to find any other indication of copying or any deleted versions of this article, so it looks like the BBC was only used to source the "Played by" DJs and not copied from. VernoWhitney (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * BBC Music might have written biographies at one point I'm not sure, but I'm certain BBC Music haven't written them for at least a year or two now. They definitely wouldn't have done in September 2010. When an artist doesn't have a Wikipedia article, they do not write one themselves, it just displays like this. And the source was only "most cited" because it was linked to a number of times in the same sentence - this was unnecessary as the source could have just been placed at the end of the sentence instead. I don't see why a re-write is necessary but those sources all look great so please do add them and any info from them as well and obviously your welcome to rewrite any sections which you feel could be improved! Mhiji (talk) 21:03, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was thinking about this and I'm clearly grabbing the wrong end of the stick here. I'll come join everyone else down at the other end. Bigger digger (talk) 00:57, 11 December 2010 (UTC)